tv [untitled] September 4, 2012 12:00am-12:30am PDT
commissioner clinchñr is excused and commissioner melgar is we have a quorum. >> nancy of records management division got a letter of recognition. and you for the good work there. -- thank you for the good work there. with regret, i would like to make the president's announcementnp to extend condolences to frederick who served on the advisory committee for 14 years. ñrunfortunate, he passed away.
--cóç unfortunately, he passed o wide. we extend our thoughts and prayers to his family and friends. >> excuse me. >> is there anyrb on the president's announcements? seeingñr none, general public the bic will take public comment on items not on the agenda. commissioner mccarthy: if i may, in any public comment should not beñr any personal comments for e staff. thank you. >> good morning, commissioners. my name is sincere -- spencer gough. i have a copy for sonya.
i would like to bring attention to something your department is responsible for and failing miserably at that to the. ñrmore proper payment procedures followed. we get nothing in return. secondly, i would like to express citizens who have an ax to grind with this department should begin to attend these meetings. president mccarthy, you have not put the item of racism on the agenda as i requested. have you done anything? no response. the department has a very serious problem of chinese racism, along with other seriou. you have chosen.çiqz"ti will no.
my view goes like this. there is statistical evidence that someone has instituted successful policy of only hiring chinese-american workers, particularly in the engineering class. this constitutes a racist behavior. i request an inquiry. you are responsible]j for overseeing the department of buildingñr inspection. condoning racist behavior is also a racist behavior. it is especially troubling in this setting which is supposed to represent all persons equally. i now accuse you all of being racist. is ms. walker proud of being a racist? while the realization everyone of you is are racist is ñrdisturbing enough in and of itself. i informed the mayor.
as he has also done nothing, but likely advise the gang of four commissioners to follow the course they have chosen, it appears edwin m. lee is are racist. through your inaction, are racist manner --ñr are racist mayra -- we have a racist mayor. ,vcommissionerñr mccarthy: next speaker, please. >> good morning, commissioners. san francisco coalition for responsible growth. on behalf of all of those who spoke at the last meeting or were present and cannot speak, i want to express my sincere appreciation. no more of this now serving
one, two, up 4, windows 25. now serving numberñr g48 at winw number>xt 12, drawing and irritating customers and staff. anyway, it was a very irritating afternoon. inspector. taking note of how many people were on the signing for the board's,ñfg -- for the boards, y took themñr to the first floor. commissioners, i commend and thankñr deputy sweeney and the chief building inspector for taking action. that is what dbi is all about,
customer service. another matter -- now therew3 is one clerk in charge of the division's. frankly, trying to call one of the division's i am on hold for minutes. is not a small department. we have so many inspectors with building. i think we could really work much better. i hope he would consider that. 're all quite happy with what is going on right now. thank you very much. commissioner mccarthy:ñr next speaker. seeing none -- >>ñr÷m item four, discussion of
attrition valuesñrqgñ for dbi compared to other departments. > pamela levin, deputy directr of services. we are passing out a presentation so you can seev?t t in a more face-to-face type of format. we last talked about the budget, and you had requestedp$t we loot the attrition of values we were budgeted at four some ofñr the department's. 's 2jñ%
as pamela mentioned, last time the commissioners at a few questions about attrition. that you will see one has to do with the fiscal year fy12 budget, which just ended. there were approximately;jy 267 employees. the attrition plan for the department was 24.5 to. thatñr reprqm÷ a 9% attrition level. thatrpy is pretty midrange when some are lower.
éucomparable, i would say. the da has a 12% while building inspections and has 11%. the buildingñr inspector's offie as 9%. i made a chart for 2013-2014. that is when you see a bigger increaseñ in dbi's overall coun. ó÷o8%. some otherñ departments ri. it goes up to 12%. one of the reasons whys6 that became the case was we did add more to the budget to increase the demand for services.
as we go alongñiñr2!, that attrn number could changem]w dependinn a4xhow and what position could e filled. i think one of the things the commissioners areñr probably concerned with is the budgeted patriciane4x moble -- ñrattritin level. there are reasons for that number. ñrthere are more retirements. sometimes it takes a little longer to fill a position. that number might sometimes be a ñrthat being said,ñi the budget attrition isñr pretty mid-rangei would say. ñri don't know if there are any commissioner:óç walker?
t&commissionerñr walker: i do't have any questions. i think this is really helpful in giving us a quick#çq picturef where we are. you mentioned the department sets the attrition rate. ñrdbi? + mayor's office worked with dbi -- >>hññ with pamela? >> yes, with pamela and staff. knew we would have to ramp up fte count. you do not want the attrition level to be so prohibitive is çócounterintuitive to those positions. >> thank you.
one of the reasons this was on my radarñr, there was the crisis we went through, the hiring and so 1. i do not knowñr if the question is addressed. we do notvkñ our rate that you would like everybody tozfñçó be. if other departments are around 9%, then we should be at 9%, even though we have a different agenda, a different type of conference. i am just trying to figure this out. i think you might have answered. >> you know, i think it really depends. jçui don't think there is one it acceptable attrition level for all departments. some departments to have -- i mean, they need to hire personnel.
but i think given whereñr dbi ws three or four years ago and givjatu$ey are now, i think the economy was in its downturn phase and it spiked higher. >> right now, i do not think 24 is all that much. it is going to be 300-úlñplus positions. >> pam, one question forñr youl, please. w3are you coming to a conclusion of an acceptable rate that will work at the department with so many budgets over the years here? >> géit has not changed for the
last four or five years i have in your. it has always been 25%. we have worked very hard at not ñrhaving it change. we are so cyclical, keeping it at the samesñk level, we can mae sure we ¢2uz enough funding. there are a lot of things that affect attrition, and one of them is how -- what kind of positions you have. our inspectors tend to, and want to stay for a long time. that means -- tend to come and want to stay for a long time. ythe clerks tend to stay longer than the clerks in other departments. fáthat needs to be factored into the equation about what one department has versus another department. we have had, as you know, a high level of vacancies.
getting and attracting positions. and i will mention this -- we haveñr long discussions with the budget analyst's office and what they wanted to do is increase our attrition for the fiscal year because they did not think we would be able to distill all of the decisions based on our hiring plan. we look at the hiring plan, look at the decisions, at the provide services best we can, and we said to them if you agree to the attrition rate, you are going toync tie our hands and we will not be able to actually operate. it would not givexd us any flexibility. w3we successfully argued that point. what really happens with attrition is it is historical.
it chan. if the department is successful+ it will not change$ñ by anythig else other than the cost of living. any change in the salary line will change the number of positions we have to keep vacant. what we're trying to do is keep it at an even keel, but what this means is over 12 months we have to have the equivalent of ñr24, 25 positions vacant. we do look at the gross -- at the gross number of positions. he really is about dollars, because you are notm all your positions. i think we have been very successful. some divisions, some departments have gone back. be very$ tt &e%ei
departments have gone back to show what they are experiencing in order to move the money about. but that will not serve us very well because we have such a cyclical nature. if we know things are getting tight, we may not stillç,w the positions, and therefore there is more attrition. if things are getting better, we will work with the mayor's p4ñoffice to make sure we do noo over budget. it really is a balancing act so we are not inconsistent. >> may i -- you mentioned the department is required to do this. but then i just asked a question about the department andttú who sets it, so -- can yu talk about how that is done? 7n÷ñr>> yes.4) veep sudeep rules, as far as i
know -- >>$ob the city rules, as going back td,vójá)p&e%ei numbers used in years past and used kcáq)e. you know,k[ we do not budget at 100% ofpo salaries, because we know there is going to be movement. there will be retirements, there will be hires. we have the flexibility to move our attrition, if we want to. but the goalxyñ isñr -- ÷ colleague would agree -- rimisñe budgeted attrition decreases so much, you are never going to get
back. to get level and work with the ebb and flow of positions is much more preferable than to cut the salary budget by adding more positions. it is a business. i mean, i will just be honest with you. ñrwe look at that. inñrm-÷ march, itñr is an artiff the past that)tú we used for the budget. sometimes the mayor's office was more successfuls"u and we incree it. sometimes a department like us has been very successful with 24, 25 positions. >> good. any more questions? all right. thank you. thank you to the mayor's office. >> is there any public comment on item for -- in four?
seeing none, itemcw÷ five updatn the bicñr subcommittees', access appeals commission, board of examiners, and could advisory committee. >> good morning. i thought i would give you a quick overview on access appeals. it then we can talk about the code advisory committee. the access appeals commission is a five-person commission that meets twice a month. ñrit is comprised of people from the disabled community as well as the constructionñr industry d a public member. the idea behind that commission, when someone has a dispute about the way the disability somaccess rules are being interpreted, particularly by
the department and u) codes, then they have the right through written appeal to this commission to take the case there and have the commission make a ruling on its. $xthat isñr the heart and soulf g>> some issues have come up recently in the business community about lawsuits,ñr isss about permitting and whether it complies with federal standards. and wonder if we can useçó these to help us proactively, rather than reactive lee come up with those kinds of things, --th ratr n -- reactivelyñr , up with those kinds of things.
>> 5nhi do not think if there is any rationalñiñr reason not to e advantage of their expertise. i know that they are addressing those kinds of issues or attempting to address some. i personally see no problem. >> i think it would be helpfulq as an advisory. mayw3 be the city attorney can tell us if we can do that. >> john;pñ malamut, ñrcity att's office. the action is strictly a body that can hear appeals of dbi decisions. it is a bit like the board of appeals. it would be equivalent to
having the board of appeals, say, have a joint meeting with the planning commission. it is not -- wbic kazis a littlt different in terms of thecrt but dbi, the department to work with, it is sortñr of the decisn maker in terms of appeals. appeals from aggrieved parties to think the way the department ñris applying the rules is inappropriate. so,bkxthñ7]d i not know if it me to work with them collectively as a body in terms of some of these issuesc(u -- x6w>> let me be clear
commissioner walker:ñr let me be clear about how we created this access appeals commission. i do feel they have very particular knowledge about the issue. they would be very helpful. so, if we may be need to expand its -- if we set forward that criteria, i needçó job, --ñr thr knjjob, per se,çqg can we expan? >> i cannu÷ look into that. d8wi believe at a minimum it has been set out legislatively with various requirements to the administrative code. that may need to be amended and there is a charter requirement as well. commissionerñr walker:h%ñ ok. thank you. >> quickly, about the board of vxexaminers, that is actually a
10-mperson committee full of experts in engineering and construction, some fire personnel. it meets on request when someone is looking at an equivalencyñr r an alternative type of building approach that may not be specified in coats. ñrso, as -- specifiedñr in code. vízso, as a consequence, theyñ"y need a couple times a year. çóit is a committee of experts n code-related issues. with that, i will turn it over to my colleague. building inspector. one of my duties is to be the
secretary of thewn committee. to thatq access of appeals commission is currently having joint meetings with the code advisorykm committee to develop some input into the administrative bulletin, access issues. we are using their expertise to deal with the code issues. >> great. -- commissioner walker:u y grea. >> as far as:ci the code advisoy committee, there are 15 members. they deliberate and make recommendations on matters pertaining to theh+d building ad improvement of the content of the san francisco building code , electrical code, plumbing code, and housing code. fáthe rules and regio